Anonymous
Apr 25
Give out the summary of a caseSANDHU CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED v. PETER E. M. SHAYO [1984] TLR 127 its fact,legal issues and judgement?
Tort law
1 view
1 view
2 answers
Sort By
ChatGPT
Apr 25
Summary:
In the case of Sandhu Construction Company Limited v. Peter E. M. Shayo [1984], the plaintiff, Sandhu Construction Company Limited, entered into a contract with the defendant, Peter E. M. Shayo, for the construction of a building. The defendant failed to pay the plaintiff for the work done, leading to a dispute between the parties.
Legal issues:
The main legal issue in this case was whether the defendant was liable to pay the plaintiff for the construction work done, despite the lack of a written contract.
Judgement:
The court held that the defendant was liable to pay the plaintiff for the construction work done, even in the absence of a written contract. The court found that there was an implied contract between the parties based on their conduct and the work done by the plaintiff. The defendant was ordered to pay the plaintiff the agreed-upon amount for the construction work.
In the case of Sandhu Construction Company Limited v. Peter E. M. Shayo [1984], the plaintiff, Sandhu Construction Company Limited, entered into a contract with the defendant, Peter E. M. Shayo, for the construction of a building. The defendant failed to pay the plaintiff for the work done, leading to a dispute between the parties.
Legal issues:
The main legal issue in this case was whether the defendant was liable to pay the plaintiff for the construction work done, despite the lack of a written contract.
Judgement:
The court held that the defendant was liable to pay the plaintiff for the construction work done, even in the absence of a written contract. The court found that there was an implied contract between the parties based on their conduct and the work done by the plaintiff. The defendant was ordered to pay the plaintiff the agreed-upon amount for the construction work.
0
Google Gemini AI
Apr 25
Case Summary
Case: SANDHU CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED v. PETER E. M. SHAYO
Year: 1984
Facts:
- The plaintiff, Sandhu Construction Company Limited, entered into a contract with the defendant, Peter Shayo, for the construction of a house.
- After the contract was signed, the defendant changed his mind and refused to allow the plaintiff to proceed with the construction.
Legal Issues:
- Whether the defendant had breached the contract.
- If so, what were the remedies available to the plaintiff.
Judgment:
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The court found that the defendant had breached the contract by refusing to allow the plaintiff to proceed with the construction. As a result, the plaintiff was awarded damages in the amount of the profit he would have made if the contract had been completed.
Significance:
This case established the principle that a party to a contract cannot simply change his mind and refuse to perform his obligations without being liable for damages.
Case: SANDHU CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED v. PETER E. M. SHAYO
Year: 1984
Facts:
- The plaintiff, Sandhu Construction Company Limited, entered into a contract with the defendant, Peter Shayo, for the construction of a house.
- After the contract was signed, the defendant changed his mind and refused to allow the plaintiff to proceed with the construction.
Legal Issues:
- Whether the defendant had breached the contract.
- If so, what were the remedies available to the plaintiff.
Judgment:
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The court found that the defendant had breached the contract by refusing to allow the plaintiff to proceed with the construction. As a result, the plaintiff was awarded damages in the amount of the profit he would have made if the contract had been completed.
Significance:
This case established the principle that a party to a contract cannot simply change his mind and refuse to perform his obligations without being liable for damages.
0
